Appeal No. 2004-2363 Page 3
Application No. 09/224,211
OPINION
In reaching our decision in this appeal, we have given careful consideration to
the appellants' specification and claims, to the applied prior art references, and to the
respective positions articulated by the appellants in the brief and reply brief and the
examiner in the final rejection and answer. As a consequence of our review, we make
the determinations which follow.
Claims 7 and 81 read as follows:
7. The method of claim 6, wherein changing a collection comprises adding a
user interface control.
8. The method of claim 6, wherein changing a collection comprises removing
a user interface control.
Moody's invention provides a software facility for dynamically synthesizing an
application that is customized for the user of the application based on characteristics, or
1 Parent claims 1 and 6 read as follows:
1. A method of regulating user interface controls, the method comprising:
receiving a user identity for a user;
accessing a maturity level for the user in a database based on the user identity;
automatically associating a grouping with the user identity by selecting a grouping from
among a plurality of groupings based on the maturity level for the user; and
automatically providing a set of user interface controls corresponding to the identified
grouping, the set of user interface controls including a toolbar.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein automatically providing the set of user interface controls
comprises changing an existing collection of user interface controls.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007